56 Responses to “Dugout Chatter”

1. 

   Tom MEANS says:

   05/09/2007 at 1:22 pm

   My friend Larry has been playing me John Hiatt’s ‘Slug Line’ since it came out. I. Do. Not. Get. The. Appeal.

   0 High Five
2. 

   mrclean says:

   05/09/2007 at 2:18 pm

   “1984” by Bowie

   0 High Five
3. 

   michael k says:

   05/09/2007 at 2:32 pm

   “1977” by The Clash

   0 High Five
4. 

   michael k says:

   05/09/2007 at 2:33 pm

   “Early 1970” by Ringo Starr

   0 High Five
5. 

   kpdexter says:

   05/09/2007 at 2:57 pm

   Dayton Ohio 19 something and 5

   GBV

   0 High Five
6. 

   hrrundivbakshi says:

   05/09/2007 at 4:50 pm

   Road Trip purchase: Hm. I bought a compilation of late 40s/early 50s Ghanaian big band music on a work trip to Africa a year or so ago, and it’s pretty slammin’. Seriously, in the same way that ska/blue beat/rocksteady is preferable to my ears than 90% of the reggae out there, I prefer this older African music that was made to more closely ape Western music styles. This band (can’t for the life of me remember the name right now) was wildly popular with British soldiers stationed in Accra, and I can hear why!

   LP I ought to “get,” but don’t: “Highway 61 Revisited,” but you already knew that.

   Rock date song: come ON, dude! “1969,” the greatest rock date song EVER.

   Dunno from Arctic Monkeys.

   Mojo insight: I’ve always been shocked at how little attention rock geeks pay to the actual gear used by the Beatles on each song. We have this image of them strumming occasionally on Epiphone Casinos, or flat-top Gibsons, there’s the “Beatle bass,” etc. — but what amps did they play in the studio? How were they miked? Did they ever actually record those turquoise strats I’ve seen a few snaps of? When exactly? If they did, why did they choose them? Etc. And, Plurbie, before you jump on my shit for being a gearhead, instrument selection is very important! (I mean that literally, by the way. I don’t think a particular guitar can make or break a song — but I like understanding why, for example, Billy Gibbons put down his Les Paul and grabbed an old Strat for the amazing, chime-y rhythm guitar on “Jesus Just Left Chicago.” Why shouldn’t we know this stuff about the Greatest Band In the History Of Rock and Roll?)

   Hear Factor: No.

   0 High Five
7. 

   Mr. Moderator says:

   05/09/2007 at 5:17 pm

   Hrrundi, do you have that Beatles gear book that came out a year or two later? I don’t, but it sounds right up your alley. Good point, though, regarding a generally unexplored avenue.

   “1969” is no better than the second-best “year song”; that distinction goes to “1970”. However, both songs were excluded in the set up to the question.

   Thanks for your candid answer re: Hear Factor. I’m surprised that the man behind Thrifty Music isn’t sampling. That’s not a challenge, by the way. However, I for one have been awaiting your next installment!

   0 High Five
8. 

   hrrundivbakshi says:

   05/09/2007 at 6:31 pm

   Whoops, sorry, didn’t read the rules carefully enough. For my Rock Year Song, I’ll go with “2,000 Light Years From Home,” one of my fave Stones deep traxx. Would that count?

   Re: my next Thrifty Music sampler — it’s on the way, and it’ll be a corker. I *promise*. In fact, I bet even Plurbie will approve. NOT that the point of the series is to shock and awe with wonderful pieces of music. Again, the purpose of the Thrifty Music series is to document the odd places you can visit when you have no destination in mind and no money to get there.

   Re: Hear Factor — I don’t mean to disrespect the concept, I just don’t think I’d be a good lab rat for it. I respectfully recuse myself.

   0 High Five
9. 

   Mr. Moderator says:

   05/09/2007 at 6:59 pm

   Good question about “2,000 Light Years…” Mmmm… We’ll have to let The People decide.

   No disrespect taken whatsoever, re: Hear Factor. I’m simply wondering if it’s worth the effort getting a zip file of a whole mix up there for folks to enjoy. Thanks.

   0 High Five
10. 

    geo says:

    05/09/2007 at 7:35 pm

    Not a date, a distance. Disqualified!!!!

    0 High Five
11. 

    geo says:

    05/09/2007 at 7:44 pm

    I would pull down a zip of virtually any HearFactor mix to explore at work. I’ve been listening extensively to my HearFactor mix and I will tap out some comments in the not too distant future. It was generally outside of my normal listening syles, but not offensively so. I’ve studiously avoided learning anymore about the many artists on it that are completely unknown to me so that I could make wild ass guesses about the era and locality of the acts.

    0 High Five
12. 

    Mr. Moderator says:

    05/09/2007 at 9:12 pm

    Geo wrote:

    Not a date, a distance. Disqualified!!!!

    The People have spoken!

    0 High Five
13. 

    BigSteve says:

    05/09/2007 at 9:52 pm

    …is there a great rock song with a date in it?

    I was going to suggest Randy Newman’s Dayton Ohio 1903, but that’s not really a rock song. Then I was going to suggest Zager & Evans’ In the Year 2525, but then I remembered that that song sucks. So I’m going to go with that fine Dave Alvin song called 4th of July that’s on the X album See How We Are. (You said a date.)

    0 High Five
14. 

    hrrundivbakshi says:

    05/09/2007 at 10:56 pm

    Here’s a huge Winner in the rock date category: “September,” by Earth, Wind & Fire.

    As Dale Gribble would say: “sha-shaaaaah!”

    0 High Five
15. 

    BigSteve says:

    05/10/2007 at 12:15 am

    September is not a date; it’s a month.

    0 High Five
16. 

    General Slocum says:

    05/10/2007 at 6:55 am

    When I was a teenager, and played horns in the Johnny Carson Band (my friend Paul Carson, who was an amazing guitarist who passed away a while back, had a brother John who named his band so it would sound like a bluesy band, seeming oblivious to the fact that the name Johnny Carson was already an American institution), we did a gig at Grendel’s Lair. Since I hadn’t played but a handful of downtown dates then, I’m considering that a roas trip. I went across the street to the Booktrader and found Zappa’a Absolutely Free and the soundtrack to Satan In High Heels. Both beautiful gatefold covers, and fantastic records.

    On the road with Baby Flamehead, I continued my collection of Herb Alpert Whipped Cream and Other Delights records. (It has been called to my attention that there is a whole thing about this, a book or article or zine or blog, so don’t pince nez me on it.) I brought home a hefty pile of them from the thrift stores of a generous nation. And just last week, I had finally found a place to display my fine collection without offending my wife, in the upstairs of our barn in the new Gentlemen’s Lounge. I went downstairs to grab the box, and it had disintegrated! Tragedy! All 70-something copies of that album, as well as numerous more practical records, ruined! I know my geeky bretheren will feel for me on this one, so I share…

    The record I will never get the appeal of remains Pet Sounds. An utter mystery to me.

    I have been downloading most of the Hear Factor things. I would do whole mixes for sure.

    0 High Five
17. 

    hrrundivbakshi says:

    05/10/2007 at 7:40 am

    1999, 1969 and 1970 are not dates; they’re years.

    0 High Five
18. 

    kpdexter says:

    05/10/2007 at 7:51 am

    Speaking of Hear Factor, I still haven’t gotten mine yet, Mr Mod, if you just want to post a link to it, I can grab it that way!

    0 High Five
19. 

    Mr. Moderator says:

    05/10/2007 at 8:15 am

    Kpdexter: I’ll get you a link to your Hear Factor CD in a little while. Stay tuned! Sorry for the delay.

    Listen up, you guys can argue about what constitutes a “date” all you want, but I have to admit I was thinking “Year” when I asked the question. I’ll accept “September”, although I personally can’t stand that song, but we will not accept “Light Years” or any song with “half-life” in the title.

    Keep ’em coming!

    0 High Five
20. 

    saturnismine says:

    05/10/2007 at 8:40 am

    fritz, “september” is a month that occurs every year and therefore does not constitute a “date”. “1969” is a year that has come and gone and DOES constitute a date.

    0 High Five
21. 

    mrclean says:

    05/10/2007 at 9:03 am

    The General sez:
    “…Whipped Cream and Other Delights…And just last week, I had finally found a place to display my fine collection without offending my wife, in the upstairs of our barn in the new Gentlemen’s Lounge.

    I am so sad to hear this. I remember you had designs on wallpapering the bathroom with those covers – what a great concept that was. But the Gentleman’s Lounge sounds good. I remember you showing me that space. I hope membership is open and I look forward to tipping a glass with you there sometime soon…

    0 High Five
22. 

    saturnismine says:

    05/10/2007 at 9:11 am

    fritz,

    i think there’s more info on beatles gear habits (including their choices of axe) than you realize.

    for mic-ing try “all you need is ears”, written by george martin. there’s also a book that gives pretty much a minute by minute account of every recording session…can’t remember it’s title but i recall it being along the lines of “the beatles: the complete recording sessions” or something like that.

    re. the strat, it’s definitely the guitar of choice for george on the “nowhere man solo”. i think i read that in one of the above sources.

    you’re right it’s a fascinating subject.

    0 High Five
23. 

    mrclean says:

    05/10/2007 at 9:44 am

    If you can afford it, the Beatles book to get as far as recording and gear goes is “Recording The Beatles”
    http://recordingthebeatles.com/

    It’s 100 bucks though…but well worth it to the recording/Beatles geek. I was lucky and was given a copy as a gift.

    Amazing book! Beautifully packaged and printed.

    0 High Five
24. 

    General Slocum says:

    05/10/2007 at 10:37 am

    Saturn sez:
    fritz, “september” is a month that occurs every year and therefore does not constitute a “date”. “1969” is a year that has come and gone and DOES constitute a date.

    September Gurls? I say, since there are precious few *good* songs with dates, we should be erring toward inclusiveness over such a trivial question. It seems more about the mention than about getting that crucial RTH date-song prize. Surely May 10th is a date, Art, even though it will return next year (‘nsh’allah.) So, 6 a.m. Or Nearer by the Guess Who is clearly a time and not a date. A year, a month a day of a month, with or without a year, are all within the date idea, aren’t they? When the oscillating universe collapses back, bringing 1969 back in reverse, and our legless progeny are debating the Stooges without speaking aloud, boy will you have egg on *your* face!

    0 High Five
25. 

    saturnismine says:

    05/10/2007 at 11:03 am

    fritz, first you get all cranked up about a seeming “lack of attention” to the beatles’ gear use, despite numerous publications addressing the question in mincing detail, then you want to argue that temporal designations without years affixed constitute dates.

    are you from bizarro world?

    i don’t really care about this date thing (and if it’s as trivial as you say, then why are you arguing on and on about it?). whatev.

    i WOULD, however, love to see the oscillating universe collapse back!

    0 High Five
26. 

    BigSteve says:

    05/10/2007 at 11:11 am

    Deodato’s ‘Also Sprach Zarathustra (2001)’ had a year in the title.

    0 High Five
27. 

    BigSteve says:

    05/10/2007 at 11:25 am

    What’s the best musical purchase you ever made on a road trip?

    Years ago I was on a miserable trip to Seattle, and the one bright spot was finding this Duke Reid rocksteady compilation called BaBa Boom (http://www.roots-archives.com/release/669) on CD. I had the LP, but this was the time before I figured out how to transfer LPs to CDRs. It’s got a few of my favorite tracks, and the track sequence is perfect. I was briefly very happy, but the guy who took me to the store bought a Doris Day CD and tried to convince me she was as good a singer as Ella Fitzgerald. Seriously.

    0 High Five
28. 

    sally_cinnamon says:

    05/10/2007 at 12:05 pm

    All I can think of right now is “years” and “months” not necessarily date and Kim Fowley’s instrumental track “Fresno, 1963”, Teenage Fanclub’s “December” and Big Star’s “September Gurls” I guess I got nothin’. I’m down with all the Hear/Factor tracks in downloadable format. I received one copy from Al already which is way cool – and believe it or not – although I wasn’t able to give BigSteve’s CD the whole 3 days (I did do two) I’ve been splitting it up onto a cassette tape and generally going back to it when I can to give it my full attention and I’ve already listened to it a few times on my rides to work (for something different) to explore it more. I’m still struggling to figure out what I’m listening to and how it makes me feel. I think my favourite has turned out to be the Ricardo Villalobos track. Just off the top of my head, I think it would be interesting if Mojo celebrated the top 50 best mono record releases that still stand up to the test of time vs. stereo rereleases, maybe? Yesterday I picked up this month’s issue of “LOUD, FAST, RULES” – have any of you seen that? It’s only 3.99, comes with a punk CD and it’s issues deal with punk releases on a year by year basis – the first one detailed 1977, and I picked up this one (1982) more for the articles that I noticed were in it – The Clash are on the cover because there’s an article on the Clash exhibit at the Rock n’ Roll Hall of Fame, and a really interesting article written by Jack Rabid (from Big Takeover). Maybe Matt B could expand on this. Anyway, it’s reminding me of when I first opened up a Maximum Rock n’ Roll or Flipside. Black newsprint spreads and ink all over my fingers!;)

    0 High Five
29. 

    saturnismine says:

    05/10/2007 at 12:24 pm

    hey sally, thanks for the pingback definition! are our posts pingbacks?

    i don’t mind the “expanded approach” to songs with dates, ‘cuz it’s not really that important. so, howzabout “april come she will” or the photon band’s (my) own “maybe in november?” or “see you in september”?

    i don’t know…the historian in me is uncomfortable with the cyclical nature of yearless submissions in response to a request for “songs with dates in their titles”. as i said before, though, whatev.

    0 High Five
30. 

    sally_cinnamon says:

    05/10/2007 at 12:42 pm

    hey sally, thanks for the pingback definition! are our posts pingbacks?

    hmmm. I don’t know. I’m not sure how deep the definition of a ping goes. I guess they would qualify, but maybe I’m not completely as nerdy as I think I am. Then again(!) Anyway, mostly when I think of pingbacks, I think of them being used to check a server to see whether a link destination is working, ex. “I ping’d that server, but it looks like the site is down” You’re actually getting a packet or signal back to you to respond on how something is working or to even grab a document/file. Maybe The Back Office would like to field this one. There are also trackbacks, which because of the XHTML being used in this blog, I think is probably what is being used for comments and keeping track of them moreso than pingbacks, but I have no idea because I didn’t build this site…

    I am the eggman, woooh, I am the eggman, wooo, I am the Walrus – koo-koo-ka-choo…!

    0 High Five
31. 

    General Slocum says:

    05/10/2007 at 2:25 pm

    What’s the best musical purchase you ever made on a road trip?

    Also on trips with Krissy on 2 separate occaissions in Portland, Maine, I bought a Silvertone archtop acoustic that’s still my main acoustic guitar, and a Line 6 amp in brand new shape. The guitar was in some hipster clothing store with a few instruments in the back, and the amp was cheap cheap, in a pawn shop.

    0 High Five
32. 

    sally_cinnamon says:

    05/10/2007 at 3:34 pm

    Mr. Mod sez:

    I’ll accept “September”, although I personally can’t stand that song,

    I’m curious – why not? Bad memory or just the song itself/tune?

    0 High Five
33. 

    Mr. Moderator says:

    05/10/2007 at 3:51 pm

    I don’t like Earth, Wind & Fire, in general, because they sound – to me – like a black Chicago. And I don’t really like Chicago. they sound too much like Blood, Sweat & Tears. 🙂

    0 High Five
34. 

    sally_cinnamon says:

    05/10/2007 at 4:00 pm

    Ha ha – that’s so funny, because I was thinking that you were talking about “September GURLS” 😉 But, okay!

    0 High Five
35. 

    hrrundivbakshi says:

    05/10/2007 at 4:55 pm

    Come on, Slokie — you actually *like* that Line 6 monstrosity?!

    Plurble: you need to keep a safe distance from this guy, Squier or no.

    0 High Five
36. 

    General Slocum says:

    05/10/2007 at 5:39 pm

    Hrrundivie pressures:
    Come on, Slokie — you actually *like* that Line 6 monstrosity?!
    Plurble: you need to keep a safe distance from this guy, Squier or no.

    First of all, Mr. Plurbie has other, far more productive bees in his bonnet to help him distance himself from my musical outlooks. Secondly, I love my Line 6. And it’s no Fender Twin, senator, but it does have a “Muddy As Shit, Midrange Fest” setting, which is industry code for “Fender.” I need versatility, and I need to save my fricking back. I can get a beautiful dirty sound on that thing, no array of pedals, just a cry baby, if that. The only thing I genuinely don’t like on these amps is the reverb. There’s nothing like cheesy springs for a guitar!

    0 High Five
37. 

    saturnismine says:

    05/10/2007 at 6:11 pm

    the line 6 is a GREAT little studio amp. gives lotsa real nice tones, especially with single coil gitars.

    0 High Five
38. 

    Mr. Moderator says:

    05/11/2007 at 9:52 am

    Is the Line 6 one of those digital amps that pretends to sound real? If so, I don’t care what your ears tell you, that thing blows. It’s immoral, it weighs too little, and what’s with that name – “Line 6”? What’s cool about that? Shoot me before I play the Line 6!

    0 High Five
39. 

    mrclean says:

    05/11/2007 at 10:26 am

    Mr. Moderator said:
    “Is the Line 6 one of those digital amps that pretends to sound real? If so, I don’t care what your ears tell you, that thing blows. It’s immoral, it weighs too little, and what’s with that name – “Line 6″? What’s cool about that? Shoot me before I play the Line 6!”

    Now wait a minute. You’re obviously baiting the good General for a response here. For Shame! I love the gear talk as much as the next geek (I have a Vox Valvetronix modeling amp and it kicks ass BTW…it has a real tube in it if that makes you happy…), but I was hoping this here Rock Hall wouldn’t turn into the geek nerdery that the TapeOp board is. Sheesh that place is boring with all the “What preamp should I buy?” dorky-ness…

    Carry on…

    0 High Five
40. 

    tinnitus photography says:

    05/11/2007 at 10:40 am

    billy childish – girl from 1962

    0 High Five
41. 

    Mr. Moderator says:

    05/11/2007 at 10:47 am

    MrClean, I’m not raising objections to the Line 6 based on gear geekery! I’m with you whole-heartedly regarding your aversion to those lines of discussion. Rather, I’m objecting based on the grounds of morality and aesthetics. I’m cool with the use of solid state amps – they are what they are. What I am uncomfortable with is an amp that pretends to sound like an amp while looking like an amp. Why not do away with the entire amp design altogether and just be in some standard digital devise box the size of an iPod. Then they could provide some sort of virtual speaker and really save on the wear and tear of the good General’s back.

    0 High Five
42. 

    sammymaudlin says:

    05/11/2007 at 11:28 am

    billy childish – girl from 1962

    Good one.

    0 High Five
43. 

    mrclean says:

    05/11/2007 at 12:04 pm

    Mr. Mod said:
    “What I am uncomfortable with is an amp that pretends to sound like an amp while looking like an amp. Why not do away with the entire amp design altogether and just be in some standard digital devise box the size of an iPod.”

    You meant an amp sounding like one type of amp while looking like another type of amp right? I forgot that you are also the main person around here who is not on the iPod team…maybe you’re waiting for Apple to come out with the model that looks like the “Close ‘N Play” record player?

    I kid!

    0 High Five
44. 

    Mr. Moderator says:

    05/11/2007 at 12:13 pm

    MrClean, I think I meant what I said. In all seriousness, I kid too, but what the Line 6 does, if I understand it, is not actually amplify the guitar itself but take the signal from the strings rattling and then project those impulses through a digital sequence that interprets those impulses as another sound that is not physically related to the amp-looking device itself and then amplifies that interpreted sound. Something’s extraneous in this process. I guess you need some kind of speaker, but why make the whole thing look like an amp? Why not run your little Line 6 iAmp directly into the board? See, I have no objection with those amp emulators, like the thing the Boston guitarist developed (Rockman?). That’s an honest faux amp.

    0 High Five
45. 

    mrclean says:

    05/11/2007 at 12:23 pm

    Aha! – you are talking about something totally different Mr. Mod. The General has an honest to goodness solid state Line 6 amp. He plugs his real guitar (the ol’ Sears Silvertone if I remember correctly) into it.

    The amp can just sound like a few different types of amps. Think of it having on-board effects if you will.

    But hey – I didn’t want to devolve into gear talk…

    0 High Five
46. 

    andyr says:

    05/11/2007 at 12:26 pm

    Mr. Moderator said:
    “Is the Line 6 one of those digital amps that pretends to sound real? If so, I don’t care what your ears tell you, that thing blows.

    Yes – Jimmy Mac has one. Remember the rehersal where Jim had to “reboot” his amp? It’s amazing – ALL amps – even Fenders have these modeling effects built in now.

    Date Songs – “Oh What a Night (December 1963)”and “Papa Was a Rolling Stone”

    0 High Five
47. 

    General Slocum says:

    05/11/2007 at 1:45 pm

    Mr. Moderator caniptions:
    Is the Line 6 one of those digital amps that pretends to sound real? If so, I don’t care what your ears tell you, that thing blows.

    Tut, tut:
    Never let it be said that Mr. Mod listens to the sounds he makes! “Fuck your ears, this is gear” to paraphrase Tuxedo Moon or whoever. As for the use of the word “real” here, don’t get deep. What is realer about a Peavey?

    Mr. Mod continues to writhe in ill-informed indignation:
    “What I am uncomfortable with is an amp that pretends to sound like an amp while looking like an amp. Why not do away with the entire amp design altogether and just be in some standard digital devise box the size of an iPod.”

    Tsk, tsk:
    Sadly, an amp is still needed to, well, to *amplify* the sound. My amplifier does what other amplifiers do. It takes the sound sent by the pickups and makes it louder. Your Fender has a master volume knob and a channel volume knob, which is a way of shaping the pile of poo you would like your signal to wade through before it soils my ears. (Yes, I still use my late-20th-century analog ears.) My amp allows me to choose *how* I want to dirty the sound. They basically listened to a signal, then sent that signal through a Fender, a Vox, a Marshall, whatever, and then designed the effect necessary to make the same thing happen to my signal that happens to a signal going through those amps. It “models” the path of the signal in those situations, and re-creates it. It isn’t a guitar sythesizer, as you seem to suggest. When you define the “Rockman” as in any way particularly “honest,” You’re on thin ideological ice, Mr. Mod. For years, I have been on stage acting like an oaf who is a musician while oafishly aping musical sounds to simulate an oafish ape who plays music. And no one has been the wiser. They think I really *am* an oaf! The joke’s on them!

    0 High Five
48. 

    Rick Massimo says:

    05/11/2007 at 2:55 pm

    MrClean, I’m not raising objections to the Line 6 based on gear geekery! I’m with you whole-heartedly regarding your aversion to those lines of discussion. Rather, I’m objecting based on the grounds of morality and aesthetics.

    This is why people are averse to these lines of discussion!

    (It’s also why you can’t win this one against Mr. Mod. Well, you can, but trust me, you won’t get him to realize it.)

    0 High Five
49. 

    Mr. Moderator says:

    05/11/2007 at 3:03 pm

    What’s there to “win,” as you put it, Townsman Rick? My pronouncements are based solely on the night Jim McMahon brought his Line 6 to a rehearsal. The thing rubbed me the wrong way. In doing so, I think I gained a lot of insight into its shortcomings, or at least the shortcomings of that particular Line 6 amp. In all fairness, I can’t speak for General Slocum’s Line 6.

    There are still a lot of questions to be answered from this thread’s initial set. Feel free to get back to the topics at hand and steer away from this gear geekery!

    Have a GREAT weekend, y’all – and mothers: you deserve nothing but the best! More later, including 2 more full Hear Factor mixes and your Moderator’s own Hear Factor entry.

    0 High Five
50. 

    Rick Massimo says:

    05/11/2007 at 3:17 pm

    In this context, “win” means reaching a settlement where you think anyone has learned anything.

    0 High Five
51. 

    Mr. Moderator says:

    05/11/2007 at 3:22 pm

    I think we all won with the General’s “oaf” tales.

    0 High Five
52. 

    Rick Massimo says:

    05/11/2007 at 3:49 pm

    Yeah, I’m feeling pretty good about those.

    0 High Five
53. 

    hrrundivbakshi says:

    05/11/2007 at 4:17 pm

    No, I got a beef with the General’s line of reasoning here, as follows:

    We started with amplifier “modeling,” wherein a box made out of particle board with as generic as possible a speaker is made to sound like countless other boxes, most of which were built to actually make a particular sound *and* required user savvy to maximize their goodness.

    Now, I myself have availed myself of the “POD” — basically the Jim-approved Line 6 without the amp contraption. (Jim, you would have heard it on literally every track on both the “Learning Curve” and “Job” albums.) It’s a useful gadget for home studios, but it does *not* sound anywhere near as good as the real deals, mic’ed properly.

    But that’s not my point. My point is that we now have modelling *guitars*, people — and pedals, too — where any brainless knucklehead can plug in, flip a switch, and “sound like” Hendrix, Brian May, a 1948 Broadcaster, or a ’59 flametop. You can imagine, a.) how awful these “signature sound modelers” sound in the hands of people who are not Jimi Hendrix or Brian May — and, b.) how pointless they’d be in the hands of talented musicians perfectly capable of crafting their own signature sounds. There’s just no point to them. Similarly, a talented artist can make a crap guitar and $150 amp sound better than the simulated ’65 Casino played through a simulated ’66 Vox somethingorother. So — beyond putting too much simu-tone firepower in the hands of people who can’t and won’t do anything good with it — why does it exist?

    Look, I recorded two, um, “albums” using amp modeling technology. I mean exclusively. So I know how it can make a poor man’s life better. But that doesn’t mean I think it’s a “good” product. If I could, I’d wipe all those tracks out and start over with the real deal.

    And anyway, ask yourself what’s next: vocal “modeling”? Isn’t pitch correction wrong enough?

    0 High Five
54. 

    General Slocum says:

    05/12/2007 at 3:04 pm

    Hrrundivie curmudgeons:
    we now have modelling *guitars*, people — and pedals, too — where any brainless knucklehead can plug in, flip a switch, and “sound like” Hendrix

    Now, now, man! Get a hold of yourself! You don’t believe this at all do you? I bought my line 6 in a pawn shop when I owned no guitar amp at all. I like it because it sounds good. Does it correct my crappy barchord inconsistencies? Sadly, no. It sounds like an amp. It amplifies. I understand audiofiles complaining that it doesn’t sound *enough* like these old tube amps, but that isn’t relevant to me. I’m not choosing between a Line 6 and a vintage Vox. I’m choosing between a Line 6 and a Peavey, or whatever else falls into my meagre budget. You guys should be having this whole conversation about guitar synths, or waveform editing, or all the things that change the notes you play.

    Let’s take the classic eighty-pound Fender amp, one of the amps yousay, “were built to actually make a particular sound *and* required user savvy to maximize their goodness.” Have you ever heard the sounds that come out of these? Savvy, schmavvy! People sound like crap out of every amp far more often than they sound good. To play the Line 6 set as a Hi Watt is as hard to play *well* as a Hi Watt is, the moreso because it isn’t entirely suited to being a Hi Watt. But usually I want a reasonably clean amp sound, a little overdriven. That I get just fine with the Line 6. Somehow this messes with your luddite belief system. I still am a somewhat musical, but ultimately clumsy guitarist, and that comes through in sufficiently embarassing detail to assuage any karmic fears of the “realness” of my amp.

    0 High Five
55. 

    hrrundivbakshi says:

    05/12/2007 at 7:33 pm

    I paraphrase the good General:

    McDonald’s renders the poor people of this fine nation a great service by offering mostly nutritious meals for an extremely low price.

    I answer:

    I agree! That doesn’t mean McDonald’s is “good” food. Don’t think I’m putting on airs, or casting aspersions, when I say that the Line 6 is to be avoided if at all possible.

    0 High Five
56. 

    General Slocum says:

    05/12/2007 at 11:38 pm

    Hrrundivie maligns:
    I paraphrase the good General:
    McDonald’s renders the poor people of this fine nation a great service by offering mostly nutritious meals for an extremely low price.

    I reject:
    Come come, my fine sociopath from below the Mason-Dixon! McDonald’s meals are almost entirely without nutrition, whereas my amplifier is packed with volume-increasing goodness. I think it really only pisses off the equipment fetishist, by daring to suggest that certain sounds very similar to other certain sounds with insane price tags might, in fact, quite do for playing in many situations. So you paraphrase ever so wrongly. And if you do need a fast food analogy, surely it is to be found in the Happy Meals of Peavey & Co. A Peavey amplifier provides shoddy workmanship and relative bounty of volume for an extremely low price. If I had started my first band, say, twelve years ago instead of thirty, I would have bought a Peavey, and been glad about it. My Line 6, had I paid retail, is rather dearer. And you tell me you would rather erase all the tracks you’ve recorded with a Line 6 and replace them with “the real deal.” Do you now own this “deal?” Or is this another sensation-over-substance putdown? (Your attention seeking posts do not deserve lengthy responses, but it’s late in the evening, and I’ve had a few.) To equal the sound I get from my Line 6 any other way would cost hundreds more that I do not posess. The Line 6 is not an audiophile amp, by any means. Nor is it the McDonald’s of amps. It’s … what? the Outback Steakhouse of amps? No, not even that. Fuck food metaphors. It sounds good but not superb. How about posting your Line 6 tracks next to the “real deal” tracks. Or, until such time as that particular hell freezes over, just say you don’t like them and leave it be, without putting any more ill-conceived paraphrases under my name.

    If this were an audiophile amp blog, I’d join you in pooh-poohing the Line 6. But we’re a bunch of old men (mostly) trying to keep making noise as best we can. And now “particle board” is now a big put-down as well? I’m still leveraging my mortgage to get an amp whose Naugahyde skin conceals a curly maple cabinet! So unless you left your Selmer Zodiac in your other suit, let it rest. Good night, Irene.

    0 High Five